minorninth

I’m sure this is true for some businesses, but there are also tons of businesses that have no vested interest in commercial real estate. It doesn’t explain all of it.

Honestly I think a much better explanation is that on average, bosses like being in the office and they don’t understand why everyone isn’t like them. Top leadership tends to be extroverted and they got where they are by lots of networking. They don’t have enough appreciation that for a lot of other types of people and types of jobs, being in the office just makes things harder.

Can you elaborate on what happened when you tried to search? I’ve never had trouble.

Those are all protocols for accessing an entire calendar or sharing your whole calendar, not for general-purpose inviting one user to one event.

I’m talking about using the ChatGPT API to make a chat bot. Even when the user’s input is just one sentence, it can cause ChatGPT to forget its prompt.

Is it possible to be a productive programmer with slow typing speed? Yes. I have met some.

But…can fast typing speed be an advantage for most people? Yes!

Like you said, once you come up with an idea it can be a huge advantage to be able to type out that idea quickly to try it out before your mind wanders.

But also, I use typing for so many others things: writing Slack messages and emails. Writing responses to bug tickets. Writing new tickets. Documentation. Search queries.

The faster I type, the faster I can do those things. Also, the more I’m incentivized to do it. It’s no big deal to file a big report for something I discovered along the way because I can type it up in 30 seconds. Someone else who’s slow at typing might not bother because it’d take too long.

GPT-3.5 seems to have a problem of recency bias. With long enough input it can forget its prompt or be convinced by new arguments.

GPT-4 is not immune though better.

I’ve had some luck with a post-prompt. Put the user’s input, then follow up with a final sentence reminding the model of the prompt and desired output format.

Also, did you fully cream the butter and sugar before adding any other ingredients?

If you just dump everything into the bowl and then mix, this is what happens

Did you scrape the bowl while mixing?

KitchenAid mixers are great, but depending on what you’re mixing you need to scrape the sides of the bowl with a spatula and then mix some more.

I don’t think it’s over mixed, I think the cookies made from the batter that was stuck to the sides are under mixed.

Trump might say that but he’d never actually do it. He never does anything to help others.

I'm a fan of randomizing the test order. That helps catch ordering issues early.

Also, it's usually valuable to have E2E tests all be as completely independent as possible so it's impossible for one to affect another. Have each one spin up the whole system, even though it takes longer. Use more parallelism, use dozens of VMs each running a fraction of the tests rather than trying to get the sequential time down.

I think the reality is that there are lots of different levels of tests, we just don't have names for all of them.

Even unit tests have levels. You have unit tests for a single function or method in isolation, then you have unit tests for a whole class that might set up quite a bit more mocks and test the class's contract with the rest of the system.

Then there are tests for a whole module, that might test multiple classes working together, while mocking out the rest of the system.

A step up from that might be unit tests that use fakes instead of mocks. You might have a fake in-memory database, for example. That enables you to test a class or module at a higher level and ensure it can solve more complex problems and leave the database in the state you expect it in the end.

A step up from that might be integration tests between modules, but all things you control.

Up from that might be integration tests or end-to-end tests that include third-party components like databases, libraries, etc. or tests that bring up a real GUI on the desktop - but where you still try to eliminate variables that are out of your control like sending requests to the external network, testing top-level window focus, etc.

Then at the opposite extreme you have end-to-end tests that really do interact with components you don't have 100% control over. That might mean calling a third-party API, so the test fails if the third-party has downtime. It might mean opening a GUI on the desktop and automating it with the mouse, which might fail if the desktop OS pops up a dialog over top of your app. Those last types of tests can still be very important and useful, but they're never going to be 100% reliable.

I think the solution is to have a smaller number of those tests with external dependencies, don't block the build on them, and look at statistics. Sound an alarm when a test fails multiple times in a row, but not for every failure.

Most of the other types of tests can be written in a way to drive flakiness down to almost zero. It's not easy, but it can be doable. It requires a heavy investment in test infrastructure.

Wait...the article says they're still worth $50k each.

Really?